SAML/SAMLP vs SAML2/SAMLP2 in assertions

[Chad La Joie]

No.  Their app is broken.  They clearly have no idea what an XML
namespace is.  Those prefixes are meaningless except to the extent
that they must match the prefix given when the namespace is declared.
You could (and some products do) generate random prefixes and that's
perfectly legal.

On Fri, Jan 27, 2012 at 19:07, Jeff McCullough <jeffmc at berkeley.edu> wrote:
> Quick question...
>
> I've encountered a vendor, Catertrax, that will only accept SAML/SAMLP for version 1.1 and 2.0 assertions. The Shibboleth IdP sends SAML2/SAMLP2 for SAML 2.0 assertions. The vendor sent me a bunch of links proving their point, but I know you all worked on the spec. What gives? Is there a way in the Shib IdP to specify SAML vs SAML2 assertions for a relying-party?
>
> Thanks,
> Jeff
>
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list send an email to users-unsubscribe at shibboleth.net



-- 
Chad La Joie
www.itumi.biz
trusted identities, delivered